74309d7132 In the case of Hong Kong, Korea, and Taiwan Province of China, their growth rates of total factor productivity are as outstanding as their output growth rates. Demystifying the Chinese Economy. For example, Hong Kong and Singapore have become world-leading international financial centers, whereas South Korea and Taiwan are world leaders in manufacturing information technology. The arguments at the center of the debate are based on theoretical notions of growth accounting. E-IR publishes student essays & dissertations to allow our readers to broaden their understanding of what is possible when answering similar questions in their own studies. Figures 1-4 describe the results of this growth accounting exercise. Hong Kong, and Singapore introduced trade regimes that were neoliberal in nature and encouraged free trade, while South Korea and Taiwan adopted mixed regimes that accommodated their own export industries. While the average resident of a non-Asian country in 1990 was 72 percent richer than his parents were in 1960, the corresponding figure for the average Korean is no less than 638 percent.

According to them the development of the Tigers, while ultimately successful, was highly idiosyncratic to the East Asian region and cannot be exported elsewhere, the universal alternative obviously being the liberalisation of markets (to the varying degrees required of their models). Are these policies responsible for the success of the economy, or is the success of the economy responsible for the policies? Observing that a specific variable is present along with growth does not necessarily constitute proof that the policy generates growth. Country or territory Average Internet connection speed (2015) Smartphone usage (2016) Hong Kong 15.8 Mbit/s 87%[23] Singapore 12.5 Mbit/s 100%[24] South Korea 20.5 Mbit/s 89% Taiwan 10.1 Mbit/s 78%[25] . Retrieved 17 July 2006. The view that investments and exports are engines of growth is based on one empirical and one theoretical argument. Everyone agrees that the economies of East Asia, and particularly the Four Tigers, have grown spectacularly over the past generation, but nobody seems to agree on why. By 1965, all four nations had achieved universal primary education.[10] South Korea in particular had achieved a secondary education enrollment rate of 88% by 1987.[10] There was also a notable decrease in the gap between male and female enrollments during the Asian miracle. Everything depends on what people do with the raw material of their culture.[53] If the success of state-led development in East Asia cannot be attributed to their shared culture, then what? I would suggest the missing link here is the legitimacy of these countries leaders.